On Mar 22, 4:36 am, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Colin J. Williams schrieb: > > > You might consider adding the Julian date > > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_date). > > > I had a crack at this a while ago but didn't seem to get quire the right > > result, using the ACM algorithm. I seemed to be a day out at the BC/AD > > divide.
1. Somewhere in the Colin-Christian-Nicholas thread, the "Julian date" and the "Julian calendar" seem to become conflated. 2. "day out": possibly because there is no year 0; year 1 BCE is followed immediately by year 1 CE. > > Yes, the Julian date family is very useful when dealing with dates > before 1900. I'm having some difficulty understanding the above sentence, given either interpretation of "Julian date family". What is the significance of 1900? [Julian calendar interpretation] Some countries (including Russia, China, Greece and Turkey) did not adopt the Gregorian calendar until after 1900. Dealing with a date expressed as (year, month, day) is far from easy for approx year range 1582 to 1926 unless it has been expressly tagged as e.g. "old style" or "new style". If so tagged, there is to me no difference in ease of use between the proleptic Julian calendar and the proleptic Gregorian calendar. [Julian date as used in astronomy] This supports dates back to about 4800 BCE easily, whereas Python's datetime module supports the proleptic Gregorian calendar only back to year 1 CE. Cheers, John -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
